"You die twice. One time when you stop breathing and a second time, a bit later on, when somebody says your name for the last time" Thanks for keeping the Mentzer memory alive
Wow.... that was so powerful, and true...😪 God bless you All, and make this year be a new start for a peaceful and more loving world, irrelevant of religions and origins 🤍🌐🤍💚🙏🏽💚
Thank you sir John for providing these videos on sir Mike . I've completed 30% of the book writen by him on HIT . He was genius! And you're doing a great thing . ❤ Take care .
God bless and Merry Christmas to you John! Thank you for providing us these invaluable pieces of information and Mentzer's knowledge on exercise science!
@@BingTheGallant You are very welcome. Thank you very much for your kind words and for your post. I hope you have a Merry Christmas and a great holiday season!
Yes that makes sense, I bet you could do that on any bodypart, it might be a good idea to do that on movements what can be seen as dangerous like deadlifts or squats, maybee pre exhaust on leg extentions before squats thus reducing risk of injury from lifting heavy, especially deadlifts.
@ronaldmccutcheon1329 yes I'm not hundred percent certain but I think lee haney had a similar way of thinking regarding pre exhausting, I could be wrong though.
I applied various principles of this, and I'm starting to see good progress. I do pec-deck static hold to failure supersetted with chest dips (with proper full range of motion) I even felt sore in my upper chest by doing this, and if you can, on the final reps have your friend assist you to do some controlled eccentrics as well.
@@MARKIEBANUNCE When I first heard Mike talk about it for leg extensions supersetted with legpress I was like "Static holds? Sounds weak, less intense and boring" Something along the lines. But when I tried it, man I love it more than regular reps + superset. Static holds + Compound lift supersets are my favorite now, and I implement them multiple places throughout my workouts. It's super good. And I love it.
@ looking forward to the breakdown on as many body parts as you are willing to cover. You’ve struck gold if you follow the blueprint in this video. IMO of course
I Love this! I’m thinking about using this for different compounds to bring up my weak points. One question, what if my triceps are weak point instead of chest?
@Nonstop_-bd6lh I’m actually looking into it. He did a column about it in 1980. However, I’m looking to see if he wrote about it after his work as a personal trainer in the 1990s. I seem to recall that he did write about it. If I find his most recent thoughts on the matter, I will certainly make a video about it.
If one bicep is bigger than the other, is it okay to do dumbbell bicep curls? Any tips on what to do with an arm which is visibly bigger too? Like.. my right arm is much fuller than my left one, you can even see a vein in my right bicep...
Asymmetrical development is a genetic factor that for the most part cannot be overcome by training. If you look at Arnold’s biceps, for example, one is much more peaked than the other. There is no one exercise that will bring about parity in size in a muscle that lacks the fibre density of a different muscle.
When moving on to another muscle group, would it be necessary to warm up the specific area? For example, when moving from shoulders to biceps, would it be necessary to do a couple of sets to warm up? Thanks in advance.
Merry Christmas John! I'm currently following The Ideal (Principled) Workout from Mike's final book with you. On this particular workout I seem to have plateaud on the incline press in both weight and reps. But on the pre-exhaust exercise my weight has steadily went up. Do you have any suggestions for why the incline press has stalled for me? For now I'm going to experiement taking an extra rest day.
Doesn't it matter to do pullovers supersetted with palms-up close-grip pulldowns? Mike removed it, so I guess it's not necessary anymore, or would you recommend beginners still to do them (in the beginning)?
What difference would it make to do the compound exercise first, then do an isolation chest exercise to finish the chest off? Are there any benefits of doing pre exhaust or post exhaust if the primary target muscle was not effectively stimulated on the compound exercise? I would assume performing both exercises fresher would make sense. For you will be able to lift the maximum amount of load on both exercises, not just the first one.
Training the isolation first, then the compound makes the specific muscle go to failure meaning it can be effectively stimulated, Taking the chest as an example the triceps tire out first so u isolate the chest so its tired then proceed to a heavy lift for strength to where your chest can reach its maximum level of output before triceps have to take over.
Merry Christmas! My friend is interested in joining the gym and build muscles as he is very skinny (180 cm/ 60kg). Should he follow the ideal programme or the consolidation programme? Thanks!
John, in another video you say that it's okay not to use very strict form when performing lateral raises, especially in the beginning when you lift the weights. But I am wondering, what are some weights that are generally used when following the ideal routine? So an advanced person who has been using the routine for some time, and has gained strength and weight, do the weights he uses for lateral raises also go up drastically? So 40-60 lbs dumbbells? And if this is that one exercise that you don't really go up in weight, then I guess you just go up in reps? So if I use 26 lbs dumbbells and reach failure at 10 reps, the next time I have to reach failure at 11 reps, or something? I tried using 30-35 lbs weights and even though I could them up (not very easily), it kind of didn't feel right, I mean I could lower them very slowly but still, sometimes I felt it more at one side then another, etc. I weigh like 155-160 pounds. I Googled and found out a lot of people agree on the fact that the side delts are small muscles thus it's okay to keep training them with low weights and adding more volume. I came across people weighing 200 pounds claiming that they use 20-25 lbs dumbbells to perform lateral raises and it's completely fine because "the side delts are small muscle groups.' So I tried doing that, but not only adding more reps, but also doing 2-3 sets, and even have every set be a dropset. And with the bent over lateral raises it's even worse, using 8lbs dumbbells to perform the exercise confuses me and even freaks me out a bit. Not because I don't want to be seen using these weights but because I think and it feels like it doesn't do shit. Could you please give me your view on this? Or maybe it would be a good idea to make a video about it.
The muscles that comprise the deltoids are skeletal muscles just like your biceps or your pectorals. Consequently, they respond to the same stimulus: training them to a point of muscular failure. The fact that they are smaller in size than some other muscles is not relevant. They are bigger than some muscle groups on the body and smaller than others. Your calves, for example, are not a huge muscle group, and yet they are very strong. The Internet is full of conflicting opinions - and everyone who posts has one. If you’re interested in Mike’s method, you’re not going to find answers from people who don’t know anything about it or use a training method that is contrary to his. I’ve posted over 1000 videos on this channel, many of which explain the nature of muscle growth. Check those out and see if your confusion on the subject diminishes.
Not if you perform your reps under full muscular control at all times during the set. Using weights that are too heavy and require momentum to move will increase the force that goes into your joints (which you want to avoid for safety purposes). All you're doing by starting the movement with your elbows flared out from the body and finishing the movement with the arms having moved in to the body, is allowed the pecs to perform their function against resistance (for maximum range of motion/stimulation), and if the resistance is always under the full control of the muscle being trained, you will be safe.
If I perform an incline dumbbell instead of flat dumbbell fly then it's ok? Because I feel better muscle mind connection at incline dumbbell fly but mike prefer flat dumbbell fly.🤔
Same reasons prisoners have big pectoral muscle yet do half the movement only part that targets pecks not full arm extensions needed as triceps takes over. Luckily, my chest muscles are genetically biggest and grow easy, and most times, I did was dumbell work on slight incline bench and cables. Stopped doing bench press other than 7:34 machine peck fly and some plate loaded push ones with specific angle. Used to work out for hour and kill my body than discovering HIT now grow more and less time in gym but more intense where it counts.
There is no logic in the pre-exhaustion concept. Think about it. It only takes one all out set to stimulate muscular growth. You get that for the chest by doing the pec dec movement to failure. Now you have stimulated growth in the whole pectoral muscle. Why would you then do another pec exercise after that?!? It makes no sense. For sure the bench press is not ideal for developing the pecs, because your triceps may be unable to lock out the bar many reps before the pecs are exhausted. If you nevertheless want to do bench presses, you could do them with the elbows out, like Mentzer did, but simply not lock out.
Oh the Mentzer explained this perfectly in heavy duty. Pre exhaustion isn't about simply triggering muscle fibers with a single set. Its about ensuring that you're placing maximum stress on the target muscle throughout the entire movement. You see, by isolating the pecs first (using a machine like the pec deck), you ensure that the primary muscle is already fatigued, meaning it will do most of the work in the subsequent compound movement (like the bench press). The goal is to fatigue the muscle to a point where it is forced to recruit more fibers during the compound exercise. This works especially well for stubborn muscles that do not fully engage in compound lifts without prior isolation. You correctly note that the bench press is not perfect for isolating the pecs, and I agree with you. The triceps come into play and limit the effectiveness for pure chest development. That's precisely why pre-exhaustion works i.e by the time you get to the bench press, the pecs are already fatigued, and they are forced to do more work. Without pre exhaustion, the triceps often take over the movement early on, preventing the chest from being fully engaged. By isolating the pecs first, you overcome this limitation, making the bench press much more effective for chest development. Your argument focuses too much on stimulating the muscle in one set. Thats not enough. Intensity is what drives muscle growth, and one all out set can work, but it must be done with the proper preparation. If you simply go into a compound movement like the bench press without a pre-fatigue, you’re allowing other muscle groups to do the work and diluting the stress placed on the target muscle. Pre exhaustion ensures that by the time you hit the compound movement, your muscle is fully prepared to handle the intensity and can work at full capacity. You mention doing bench presses with the elbows out, as mike did, which is a great variation to enhance chest engagement. However, this doesn’t change the fact that pre exhaustion maximizes the time under tension for the chest by ensuring the pecs are already fatigued before you hit them with the heavier compound lift. Pre exhaustion eliminates wasted effort in the gym. By isolating the muscle first, you're ensuring that every exercise works the target muscle to its maximum potential. The theory of doing multiple exercises to "fully exhaust" the muscle is flawed; its the intensity and focus of the exercises, not the sheer number, that determines the effectiveness. By using pre exhaustion, you’re applying the most efficient method of stimulating growth, avoiding the wasteful overuse of other muscles.
@Anthony-forever-mma Great answer! The main point here is efficiency with the work that you do so as to get the most bang for your buck without wasting more recovery ability than you need in the process. Another point I'd like to add (not my own Arthur Jones made this years ago) is that most people when they make the above assumption seem to have in mind that exercise equipment are perfect tools for the job in hand. Far from it! adjustable Barbells were a giant leap forward when invented but far from perfect, and most gym equipment are copies of other popular brands because "that's what everyone else is making money selling" not because they are again the best most efficient tool for the job. Thus some isometric exercises are good for different body parts, but even a poor compound is better than that. So if you are going to get the most out of the session the impetus has to be put on the compound movement (taking the above points into account from @Anthony-forever-mma) Arthur & Mikes thought processes focussed around how best to utilize their function whilst remembering the core principles discovered with high intensity training. Hard - Brief - Infrequent.
@@yezzzsir Do you now understand the importance of reason and why it is about using the mind to judge the optimal course of action, and executing it with integrity and consistency. To achieve muscle growth and real progress, one must adhere to the principle of objective reality: that the body, like any system, will respond to the most efficient and effective input. In all things, the principle of efficiency, guided by reason and clarity of purpose, is what leads to true success. It is the rational individual who knows the difference between hard work and wasted effort.
As brilliant as Mike was he never got right that progression must be made by adding volume and subsequently weight on the bar and having proper periodisation. For 99.9% of the population going 1-3 reps before failure is enought intensity of effort and this produces muscles growth indeed - numerous studies shown that in the past 25 years. Wish Mike was alive - one of the greatest bodybuilders of our time!
Thanks for your post. I'm not sure Mike "never got right" the idea you are advancing. There are certainly plenty of studies that show that training to failure will stimulate growth (I listed a dozen or so of them in a previous video on this channel), so training to failure has been proven tried and true. Moreover, a new study (sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/484) that examined the effects of single-set resistance training performed to muscular failure, versus training with 2 reps in reserve (2 reps left before failure) on various muscular adaptations revealed that hypertrophy improvements slightly favoured training to failure (“both FAIL [to failure] and 2-RIR [2 reps in reserve] elicited appreciable gains in most of the assessed outcomes. Several measures of hypertrophy tended to favor FAIL …”), but results showed no strong differences between this and training with 2 reps in reserve. And while there wasn’t a huge difference, it is important to recognize that stopping prior to failure is a bit of a moving target in terms of knowing precisely when this point arrives. Even in the study, the experimenters found the subjects had a difficult time estimating the 2 reps prior to failure in the squat exercise, for example. Stopping shy of failure, as Mike pointed out, is problematic for various reasons. First, how do you know you have stopped 1-3 reps shy of failure? What if you had 4 or 5 or 6 reps still in the tank on that particular day? What will the 1-3 reps shy of failure be based on? Your last workout that you trained this (or these) muscle groups? What if you trained hard enough in that workout to stimulate growth and rested long enough to allow that growth to manifest? Then, certainly, you should be able to exceed your previous “failure” point by an additional rep or two? But how would you know unless you trained to failure again? Stopping 1-3 reps shy of what you think might be failure on a given day is simply guesswork. As Mike also said, there are only two effective measures of intensity: 0% - where you’re not exerting yourself at all; and 100% - where you’re exerting yourself maximally. It may be that that the threshold “trigger” for growth was 91% or 87% - but how do you measure that and how would you know? By going to failure, you know that - wherever that threshold is - you passed it and stimulated growth.
@@HEAVYDUTYCOLLEGE oh training to failure works of course, the only problem is that it burns the CNS too much so in order to avoid overtraining one should train with few reps in reserve because it is not necessary to go that far in order to stimulate muscles grow. The difference between failure and non failure in that study was less that 1% but your CNS gets lots of fatigue if you go to failure... Many studies do show that more sets are producing more growth therefore more is better - if you can recover from it! Mike confused the intensity of effort with the real intensity which is the load on the bar. He did however led down the foundations of the modern sport science and showed that one should think logical and to be open minded which is really important in life. The human body has the unique ability to adapt to stress so we use that by applying moderate to high stress with increasing dose so our muscles can adapt and grow. Applying too much stress is counter- productive and leads to overtraining and injuries. The thing is that if one takes huge amounts of drugs cannot feel how much stress is applied so the person just go to the maximum, recovery is enchanted anyways. I belive this led Mike to his conclusions about the intensity of effort... We know better nowadays! Thanks for making this historical videos, it is really interesting to watch and compare the wisdom of the past and the modern science!
Thanks for your post and for your kind words. High intensity training if performed frequently could cause some stress on the adrenal glands. However the infrequency of it allows the CNS and the adrenals plenty of time to recover, and the brevity of it doesn’t stress them all that much.,Mike wrote an article about this way back in the 1980s that I may make a video out of at some point. While it’s true that Mike used steroids during his competitive years, and was doing ultra intense training with lots of forced repetitions and negative repetitions, these were abandoned when he started training natural clients in the 1990s. So, his protocol during the final 10 years of his life was based upon normal physiology and its response to the stress of exercise, rather than a physiology that is masked by the use of anabolic steroids. I think if you listened to his definition of intensity, he has not confused the issue. Load on the bar represents mechanical work, intensity is the percentage of momentary muscular effort being exerted and can be ramped up, as in a set of 10 repetitions, as opposed to an all-out one repetition maximum. The final effort on that last rap of a 10 repetition set is high intensity, but very low force. A one repetition maximum would be high force and high intensity. Mike opted for the former for safety reasons and to ensure that the targeted muscle group was fully stimulated as certain studies have shown that in the bench press, for example, a one repetition maximum involves the triceps way more than the pectorals, particularly at the completion of the movement, resulting in a less than thorough stimulation of the pectorals.
@@DB_Muscle"more sets produce more growth" is fundamentally flawed. Research consistently shows that, once a sufficient level of intensity is reached in a set, additional sets do not produce a linear increase in muscle growth. Instead, they lead to diminishing returns. Mechanical tension refers to the force exerted on muscles during a contraction. It is the most critical factor in muscle growth. When you lift a heavy weight with proper intensity, your muscles experience microtrauma, tiny tears in the muscle fibers. This damage signals the body to initiate repair processes, which result in the muscle becoming larger and stronger. Intensity defined as effort relative to your maximal capacity is the key. A single set taken to absolute failure generates enough mechanical tension to fully engage the muscle fibers, including the high threshold motor units, which are responsible for the greatest potential for growth and not 3 reps in reverse. The central nervous system cns is the command center that sends signals to your muscles via the peripheral nervous system pns. When you perform an exercise, your brain activates motor units, which consist of a motor neuron and the muscle fibers it controls. Low threshold motor units are activated during light activities and endurance work. They have limited growth potential and that's what reverse reps do, while high threshold motor units are activated only during intense effort, such as lifting near-maximal weights or performing a set to failure. These motor units control the largest and strongest muscle fibers (type IIb). When training to failure, the cns ensures that all available motor units are recruited, maximizing muscle fiber activation. This is why intensity is critical. Training below failure, while it may stimulate some fibers, does not engage the high threshold motor units to the same extent. Critics of high intensity training often argue that training to failure excessively taxes the cns. This is a misunderstanding of how the cns adapts and functions. single set to failure optimally recruits motor units without unnecessary repetition. This minimizes overall cns fatigue compared to high volume training, where repeated sets impose cumulative stress on the nervous system. The cns recovers more quickly from brief, high intensity efforts than from prolonged, moderate-intensity efforts. This makes high intensity training sustainable when balanced with proper rest. The human body operates within finite adaptive energy reserves.
The number 1 thing that bugs me about Mike's physique is his 4 pack. I guess that's just genetics unless he didn't do alot of ab work. But he's so ridiculously scientific and intellectual that he is my favorite bodybuilder of all time. I like other bodybuilders physiques better but I would learn more from him than anybody else if he were alive.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
"You die twice. One time when you stop breathing and a second time, a bit later on, when somebody says your name for the last time"
Thanks for keeping the Mentzer memory alive
Wow.... that was so powerful, and true...😪 God bless you All, and make this year be a new start for a peaceful and more loving world, irrelevant of religions and origins 🤍🌐🤍💚🙏🏽💚
Thank you sir John for providing these videos on sir Mike . I've completed 30% of the book writen by him on HIT . He was genius! And you're doing a great thing . ❤ Take care .
ive been on HD since may 2023 and this channel just keeps on giving new quality info
That was such a great video, so well explained , it made total sense, and in only 10 min. And today happens to be my chest day😅🔥👌🏽🦾🙏🏽
samee here
I love these anatomical explanations behind the chosen exercises!
Thank you for real! These videos are the best, god bless and merry Christmas
Thanks for the kind words and Merry Christmas to you as well!
God bless and Merry Christmas to you John! Thank you for providing us these invaluable pieces of information and Mentzer's knowledge on exercise science!
Thanks for another good video, Mr. Little. Merry Christmas and happy holidays!
Thanks for the effort you put into this channel!
@@BingTheGallant You are very welcome. Thank you very much for your kind words and for your post. I hope you have a Merry Christmas and a great holiday season!
Deficit push-ups offer an amazing stretch with tension under load. It’s one of the best chest exercises out there.
Someone is a watching a certain science based lifter lol 😂 😂 😂 Heavy weight,low volume bro,iykyk 😉
Merry Liftmas one and all
For anyone reading this: congrats on being able to *THINK* about your workouts👏🏼
Good luck on your HDHIT journey🥸
thanks king
Thanks John for another great video and your work this year Merry Christmas and New year and also to Mike who will never be forgotten 🙏
Merry Christmas to you and Happy New Year - thanks for your post.
Yes Mike was right short bouts of exercise not training more total of 30-45 minutes including warm up . Mike is right
Working for me
Thanks for the clarification about the incline press being sufficient to activate the whole pectoral muscle.
No worries!
Thanks for doing this video expanding on the point.
You're welcome!
Yes that makes sense, I bet you could do that on any bodypart, it might be a good idea to do that on movements what can be seen as dangerous like deadlifts or squats, maybee pre exhaust on leg extentions before squats thus reducing risk of injury from lifting heavy, especially deadlifts.
Exactly what Mike said.
@ronaldmccutcheon1329 yes I'm not hundred percent certain but I think lee haney had a similar way of thinking regarding pre exhausting, I could be wrong though.
Excellent information. Will experiment with this. Thanks
Is there anything you don't know about exercise, John? That's amazing! Thank you.
Great video!
Great, informative video John.
Many thanks!
Brilliance!! 🙌👏☝🥇💯🏆💪😉
I applied various principles of this, and I'm starting to see good progress.
I do pec-deck static hold to failure supersetted with chest dips (with proper full range of motion)
I even felt sore in my upper chest by doing this, and if you can, on the final reps have your friend assist you to do some controlled eccentrics as well.
Best shit ever
That static hold is GANGSTER
I LOVE IT & HATE IT AT THE SAME TIME
@@MARKIEBANUNCE When I first heard Mike talk about it for leg extensions supersetted with legpress I was like "Static holds? Sounds weak, less intense and boring" Something along the lines.
But when I tried it, man I love it more than regular reps + superset.
Static holds + Compound lift supersets are my favorite now, and I implement them multiple places throughout my workouts.
It's super good. And I love it.
Great job on this video from a kinesiology graduate 🎉
Thanks very much for the validation and for your post!
@ looking forward to the breakdown on as many body parts as you are willing to cover. You’ve struck gold if you follow the blueprint in this video. IMO of course
I Love this! I’m thinking about using this for different compounds to bring up my weak points. One question, what if my triceps are weak point instead of chest?
Hi John great video as usual, by any chance will u make a video on CNS fatigue and what Mike said about it?
@Nonstop_-bd6lh I’m actually looking into it. He did a column about it in 1980. However, I’m looking to see if he wrote about it after his work as a personal trainer in the 1990s. I seem to recall that he did write about it. If I find his most recent thoughts on the matter, I will certainly make a video about it.
@ thanks a lot, as usual😁
Hi John, Is there any difference between training in the morning vs night for muscle growth?. Has Mike Menzter experimented with this?
If one bicep is bigger than the other, is it okay to do dumbbell bicep curls?
Any tips on what to do with an arm which is visibly bigger too? Like.. my right arm is much fuller than my left one, you can even see a vein in my right bicep...
Asymmetrical development is a genetic factor that for the most part cannot be overcome by training. If you look at Arnold’s biceps, for example, one is much more peaked than the other. There is no one exercise that will bring about parity in size in a muscle that lacks the fibre density of a different muscle.
Can someone explain why Mike's client use very close grip for incline press???
Mike advised using shoulder width grip ,flaring elbows towards the torso according to him wide grip doesnt target the chest effectively
Because Arnold had a wide grip. He despised Arnold :D
Arnold the 🤡 doing 50 sets for a body part lmao
I believe that the video did explain it. Merry Christmas.
Because humerus has greater range of motion with closer grip
When moving on to another muscle group, would it be necessary to warm up the specific area? For example, when moving from shoulders to biceps, would it be necessary to do a couple of sets to warm up? Thanks in advance.
Merry Christmas John! I'm currently following The Ideal (Principled) Workout from Mike's final book with you. On this particular workout I seem to have plateaud on the incline press in both weight and reps. But on the pre-exhaust exercise my weight has steadily went up. Do you have any suggestions for why the incline press has stalled for me? For now I'm going to experiement taking an extra rest day.
Doesn't it matter to do pullovers supersetted with palms-up close-grip pulldowns?
Mike removed it, so I guess it's not necessary anymore, or would you recommend beginners still to do them (in the beginning)?
I have a question. Can I do a bench press first and then a superset with a fly exercise?
Could you do it? Yes. Do you need to do it? Probably not.
What difference would it make to do the compound exercise first, then do an isolation chest exercise to finish the chest off? Are there any benefits of doing pre exhaust or post exhaust if the primary target muscle was not effectively stimulated on the compound exercise? I would assume performing both exercises fresher would make sense. For you will be able to lift the maximum amount of load on both exercises, not just the first one.
Training the isolation first, then the compound makes the specific muscle go to failure meaning it can be effectively stimulated, Taking the chest as an example the triceps tire out first so u isolate the chest so its tired then proceed to a heavy lift for strength to where your chest can reach its maximum level of output before triceps have to take over.
Merry Christmas! My friend is interested in joining the gym and build muscles as he is very skinny (180 cm/ 60kg). Should he follow the ideal programme or the consolidation programme? Thanks!
Start with the least volume. You can always go up.
What are ypur thoughts on reverse grip flat bench? Apparantly it works the upper chest 30% more while incline only 5%.
As the video indicates, you cannot isolate the upper or lower regions of the chest once a meaningful load is imposed on the muscles.
John, in another video you say that it's okay not to use very strict form when performing lateral raises, especially in the beginning when you lift the weights.
But I am wondering, what are some weights that are generally used when following the ideal routine? So an advanced person who has been using the routine for some time, and has gained strength and weight, do the weights he uses for lateral raises also go up drastically? So 40-60 lbs dumbbells?
And if this is that one exercise that you don't really go up in weight, then I guess you just go up in reps? So if I use 26 lbs dumbbells and reach failure at 10 reps, the next time I have to reach failure at 11 reps, or something?
I tried using 30-35 lbs weights and even though I could them up (not very easily), it kind of didn't feel right, I mean I could lower them very slowly but still, sometimes I felt it more at one side then another, etc. I weigh like 155-160 pounds.
I Googled and found out a lot of people agree on the fact that the side delts are small muscles thus it's okay to keep training them with low weights and adding more volume. I came across people weighing 200 pounds claiming that they use 20-25 lbs dumbbells to perform lateral raises and it's completely fine because "the side delts are small muscle groups.'
So I tried doing that, but not only adding more reps, but also doing 2-3 sets, and even have every set be a dropset.
And with the bent over lateral raises it's even worse, using 8lbs dumbbells to perform the exercise confuses me and even freaks me out a bit. Not because I don't want to be seen using these weights but because I think and it feels like it doesn't do shit.
Could you please give me your view on this? Or maybe it would be a good idea to make a video about it.
The muscles that comprise the deltoids are skeletal muscles just like your biceps or your pectorals. Consequently, they respond to the same stimulus: training them to a point of muscular failure. The fact that they are smaller in size than some other muscles is not relevant. They are bigger than some muscle groups on the body and smaller than others. Your calves, for example, are not a huge muscle group, and yet they are very strong. The Internet is full of conflicting opinions - and everyone who posts has one. If you’re interested in Mike’s method, you’re not going to find answers from people who don’t know anything about it or use a training method that is contrary to his. I’ve posted over 1000 videos on this channel, many of which explain the nature of muscle growth. Check those out and see if your confusion on the subject diminishes.
Can flaring out the arms cause injuries? It looks like they might cause it...
Not if you perform your reps under full muscular control at all times during the set. Using weights that are too heavy and require momentum to move will increase the force that goes into your joints (which you want to avoid for safety purposes). All you're doing by starting the movement with your elbows flared out from the body and finishing the movement with the arms having moved in to the body, is allowed the pecs to perform their function against resistance (for maximum range of motion/stimulation), and if the resistance is always under the full control of the muscle being trained, you will be safe.
@@HEAVYDUTYCOLLEGE wow, thanks for letting me know 👏🏻💪🏻
If I perform an incline dumbbell instead of flat dumbbell fly then it's ok? Because I feel better muscle mind connection at incline dumbbell fly but mike prefer flat dumbbell fly.🤔
An inclined dumbbell flye is fine. Mike used it himself during his competitive career.
So is this chest day just 1 set of cable flys and 1 set of incline? And that’s it? Or did I miss something?
That’s it.
Same reasons prisoners have big pectoral muscle yet do half the movement only part that targets pecks not full arm extensions needed as triceps takes over.
Luckily, my chest muscles are genetically biggest and grow easy, and most times, I did was dumbell work on slight incline bench and cables.
Stopped doing bench press other than 7:34 machine peck fly and some plate loaded push ones with specific angle.
Used to work out for hour and kill my body than discovering HIT now grow more and less time in gym but more intense where it counts.
Well no wonder his grip is really close
There is no logic in the pre-exhaustion concept. Think about it. It only takes one all out set to stimulate muscular growth. You get that for the chest by doing the pec dec movement to failure. Now you have stimulated growth in the whole pectoral muscle. Why would you then do another pec exercise after that?!? It makes no sense.
For sure the bench press is not ideal for developing the pecs, because your triceps may be unable to lock out the bar many reps before the pecs are exhausted. If you nevertheless want to do bench presses, you could do them with the elbows out, like Mentzer did, but simply not lock out.
Oh the Mentzer explained this perfectly in heavy duty. Pre exhaustion isn't about simply triggering muscle fibers with a single set. Its about ensuring that you're placing maximum stress on the target muscle throughout the entire movement. You see, by isolating the pecs first (using a machine like the pec deck), you ensure that the primary muscle is already fatigued, meaning it will do most of the work in the subsequent compound movement (like the bench press). The goal is to fatigue the muscle to a point where it is forced to recruit more fibers during the compound exercise. This works especially well for stubborn muscles that do not fully engage in compound lifts without prior isolation. You correctly note that the bench press is not perfect for isolating the pecs, and I agree with you. The triceps come into play and limit the effectiveness for pure chest development. That's precisely why pre-exhaustion works i.e by the time you get to the bench press, the pecs are already fatigued, and they are forced to do more work. Without pre exhaustion, the triceps often take over the movement early on, preventing the chest from being fully engaged. By isolating the pecs first, you overcome this limitation, making the bench press much more effective for chest development. Your argument focuses too much on stimulating the muscle in one set. Thats not enough. Intensity is what drives muscle growth, and one all out set can work, but it must be done with the proper preparation. If you simply go into a compound movement like the bench press without a pre-fatigue, you’re allowing other muscle groups to do the work and diluting the stress placed on the target muscle. Pre exhaustion ensures that by the time you hit the compound movement, your muscle is fully prepared to handle the intensity and can work at full capacity. You mention doing bench presses with the elbows out, as mike did, which is a great variation to enhance chest engagement. However, this doesn’t change the fact that pre exhaustion maximizes the time under tension for the chest by ensuring the pecs are already fatigued before you hit them with the heavier compound lift. Pre exhaustion eliminates wasted effort in the gym. By isolating the muscle first, you're ensuring that every exercise works the target muscle to its maximum potential. The theory of doing multiple exercises to "fully exhaust" the muscle is flawed; its the intensity and focus of the exercises, not the sheer number, that determines the effectiveness. By using pre exhaustion, you’re applying the most efficient method of stimulating growth, avoiding the wasteful overuse of other muscles.
@Anthony-forever-mma Great answer!
The main point here is efficiency with the work that you do so as to get the most bang for your buck without wasting more recovery ability than you need in the process. Another point I'd like to add (not my own Arthur Jones made this years ago) is that most people when they make the above assumption seem to have in mind that exercise equipment are perfect tools for the job in hand. Far from it! adjustable Barbells were a giant leap forward when invented but far from perfect, and most gym equipment are copies of other popular brands because "that's what everyone else is making money selling" not because they are again the best most efficient tool for the job.
Thus some isometric exercises are good for different body parts, but even a poor compound is better than that. So if you are going to get the most out of the session the impetus has to be put on the compound movement (taking the above points into account from @Anthony-forever-mma)
Arthur & Mikes thought processes focussed around how best to utilize their function whilst remembering the core principles discovered with high intensity training. Hard - Brief - Infrequent.
@@yezzzsir Do you now understand the importance of reason and why it is about using the mind to judge the optimal course of action, and executing it with integrity and consistency. To achieve muscle growth and real progress, one must adhere to the principle of objective reality: that the body, like any system, will respond to the most efficient and effective input. In all things, the principle of efficiency, guided by reason and clarity of purpose, is what leads to true success. It is the rational individual who knows the difference between hard work and wasted effort.
As brilliant as Mike was he never got right that progression must be made by adding volume and subsequently weight on the bar and having proper periodisation. For 99.9% of the population going 1-3 reps before failure is enought intensity of effort and this produces muscles growth indeed - numerous studies shown that in the past 25 years.
Wish Mike was alive - one of the greatest bodybuilders of our time!
Thanks for your post. I'm not sure Mike "never got right" the idea you are advancing. There are certainly plenty of studies that show that training to failure will stimulate growth (I listed a dozen or so of them in a previous video on this channel), so training to failure has been proven tried and true. Moreover, a new study (sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/484) that examined the effects of single-set resistance training performed to muscular failure, versus training with 2 reps in reserve (2 reps left before failure) on various muscular adaptations revealed that hypertrophy improvements slightly favoured training to failure (“both FAIL [to failure] and 2-RIR [2 reps in reserve] elicited appreciable gains in most of the assessed outcomes. Several measures of hypertrophy tended to favor FAIL …”), but results showed no strong differences between this and training with 2 reps in reserve. And while there wasn’t a huge difference, it is important to recognize that stopping prior to failure is a bit of a moving target in terms of knowing precisely when this point arrives. Even in the study, the experimenters found the subjects had a difficult time estimating the 2 reps prior to failure in the squat exercise, for example. Stopping shy of failure, as Mike pointed out, is problematic for various reasons. First, how do you know you have stopped 1-3 reps shy of failure? What if you had 4 or 5 or 6 reps still in the tank on that particular day? What will the 1-3 reps shy of failure be based on? Your last workout that you trained this (or these) muscle groups? What if you trained hard enough in that workout to stimulate growth and rested long enough to allow that growth to manifest? Then, certainly, you should be able to exceed your previous “failure” point by an additional rep or two? But how would you know unless you trained to failure again? Stopping 1-3 reps shy of what you think might be failure on a given day is simply guesswork. As Mike also said, there are only two effective measures of intensity: 0% - where you’re not exerting yourself at all; and 100% - where you’re exerting yourself maximally. It may be that that the threshold “trigger” for growth was 91% or 87% - but how do you measure that and how would you know? By going to failure, you know that - wherever that threshold is - you passed it and stimulated growth.
@@HEAVYDUTYCOLLEGE oh training to failure works of course, the only problem is that it burns the CNS too much so in order to avoid overtraining one should train with few reps in reserve because it is not necessary to go that far in order to stimulate muscles grow. The difference between failure and non failure in that study was less that 1% but your CNS gets lots of fatigue if you go to failure... Many studies do show that more sets are producing more growth therefore more is better - if you can recover from it!
Mike confused the intensity of effort with the real intensity which is the load on the bar.
He did however led down the foundations of the modern sport science and showed that one should think logical and to be open minded which is really important in life.
The human body has the unique ability to adapt to stress so we use that by applying moderate to high stress with increasing dose so our muscles can adapt and grow. Applying too much stress is counter- productive and leads to overtraining and injuries.
The thing is that if one takes huge amounts of drugs cannot feel how much stress is applied so the person just go to the maximum, recovery is enchanted anyways. I belive this led Mike to his conclusions about the intensity of effort...
We know better nowadays!
Thanks for making this historical videos, it is really interesting to watch and compare the wisdom of the past and the modern science!
Thanks for your post and for your kind words. High intensity training if performed frequently could cause some stress on the adrenal glands. However the infrequency of it allows the CNS and the adrenals plenty of time to recover, and the brevity of it doesn’t stress them all that much.,Mike wrote an article about this way back in the 1980s that I may make a video out of at some point. While it’s true that Mike used steroids during his competitive years, and was doing ultra intense training with lots of forced repetitions and negative repetitions, these were abandoned when he started training natural clients in the 1990s. So, his protocol during the final 10 years of his life was based upon normal physiology and its response to the stress of exercise, rather than a physiology that is masked by the use of anabolic steroids. I think if you listened to his definition of intensity, he has not confused the issue. Load on the bar represents mechanical work, intensity is the percentage of momentary muscular effort being exerted and can be ramped up, as in a set of 10 repetitions, as opposed to an all-out one repetition maximum. The final effort on that last rap of a 10 repetition set is high intensity, but very low force. A one repetition maximum would be high force and high intensity. Mike opted for the former for safety reasons and to ensure that the targeted muscle group was fully stimulated as certain studies have shown that in the bench press, for example, a one repetition maximum involves the triceps way more than the pectorals, particularly at the completion of the movement, resulting in a less than thorough stimulation of the pectorals.
@@DB_Muscle"more sets produce more growth" is fundamentally flawed. Research consistently shows that, once a sufficient level of intensity is reached in a set, additional sets do not produce a linear increase in muscle growth. Instead, they lead to diminishing returns. Mechanical tension refers to the force exerted on muscles during a contraction. It is the most critical factor in muscle growth. When you lift a heavy weight with proper intensity, your muscles experience microtrauma, tiny tears in the muscle fibers. This damage signals the body to initiate repair processes, which result in the muscle becoming larger and stronger. Intensity defined as effort relative to your maximal capacity is the key. A single set taken to absolute failure generates enough mechanical tension to fully engage the muscle fibers, including the high threshold motor units, which are responsible for the greatest potential for growth and not 3 reps in reverse. The central nervous system cns is the command center that sends signals to your muscles via the peripheral nervous system pns. When you perform an exercise, your brain activates motor units, which consist of a motor neuron and the muscle fibers it controls. Low threshold motor units are activated during light activities and endurance work. They have limited growth potential and that's what reverse reps do, while high threshold motor units are activated only during intense effort, such as lifting near-maximal weights or performing a set to failure. These motor units control the largest and strongest muscle fibers (type IIb). When training to failure, the cns ensures that all available motor units are recruited, maximizing muscle fiber activation. This is why intensity is critical. Training below failure, while it may stimulate some fibers, does not engage the high threshold motor units to the same extent. Critics of high intensity training often argue that training to failure excessively taxes the cns. This is a misunderstanding of how the cns adapts and functions. single set to failure optimally recruits motor units without unnecessary repetition. This minimizes overall cns fatigue compared to high volume training, where repeated sets impose cumulative stress on the nervous system. The cns recovers more quickly from brief, high intensity efforts than from prolonged, moderate-intensity efforts. This makes high intensity training sustainable when balanced with proper rest. The human body operates within finite adaptive energy reserves.
@@DB_MuscleAlso that's why mike mentzer recommend that you should rest 5-7 days while doing HIT
The number 1 thing that bugs me about Mike's physique is his 4 pack. I guess that's just genetics unless he didn't do alot of ab work. But he's so ridiculously scientific and intellectual that he is my favorite bodybuilder of all time. I like other bodybuilders physiques better but I would learn more from him than anybody else if he were alive.